rlhyeung

Don't you think that a lot of this criticisms stems from observations and analysis of other sports? While traditional sports are contained in a set time limit, Dota isn't. I mean, I completely agree with all of you who say that these teams and players are ultimately entertainers as well, and the grand finals were undeniably underwhelming. But when I look at the grand finals, all the problems that made it underwhelming weren't how unprofessional VG was by GG'ing out early, but rather all the mistakes they made in the game and in their draft. It's been stated (by the analysts) that VG is an explosive team that win or lose games in the first 10-15 minutes, so it looked like this was the inevitable outcome. They aren't NaVi or Alliance, but rather they have their own style. I guess I'm just saying, shouldn't we be criticising their play-making rather than supposedly giving up too early? Shouldn't we be criticizing them more for sticking to the same failing strategy throughout the grand finals, rather than their obligation to entertain? I also resent the idea that VG would have been "exposed" under a more stable format, because they beat a lot of amazing teams to get to the grand finals, including DK and EG, who were the favourites to take it all. They simply lacked the answers when facing Newbee.

Does anyone remember the episode where they talk about recommendations to show significant others video games that could change their perception of what video games are? I think it might have been a reader mail, and they mentioned Bioshock Infinite, Journey, and Limbo among others. Some of my friends are going through this, so I thought I'd get them to listen to it! I just can't find it!